| Summary: | 博士 === 國立中正大學 === 教育研究所 === 91 === A study on curriculum design competence of elementary school teachers
Abstract
The main purpose of this study was both to understand curriculum design competence of elementary school teachers and to understand what factors effect it. In order to achieve this purpose, literature was reviewed to understand the curriculum design competence, design model, theoretical foundation, teacher education and related studies. Then suggested the framework of this study and produced the questionnaire. The 1019 valid samples were selected through stratified random sampling for Kaohsiung and Pintung area. Descriptive statistics, MANOVE, multiple regression and path analysis were used to analyze the data. Furthermore, six incumbent elementary school teachers were interviewed, in order to realize some important variable and influence factor that could provide more supplements and explains. Finally, conclusions were drawn from the study:
Ⅰ.Generally speaking, teachers’ curriculum design competence was more (3.26) than middle level (3.00), which meant teachers must work hard to elevate their curriculum design competence. The first factor was curriculum purpose making, the second one was curriculum implementation, the third one was curriculum selection, the fourth one was curriculum organization, and the least one was curriculum evaluation.
Ⅱ.Background variables of elementary school teachers had a significant impact on curriculum design competence; interviews had proven this relationship.
(Ⅰ) With respect to seniority in teaching, teachers with longer service performed
significantly better than the less seniority in “curriculum implementation,” “curriculum evaluation,” and “overall competence.”
(Ⅱ)With respect to job undertaken, teachers with administrative works performed significantly better than homeroom teachers in every aspect of curriculum design competence and “overall competence,” and interviews have proven this difference.
(Ⅲ)With respect to education, teachers with graduate education performed significantly better than the college education in the “ curriculum purpose making,” “curriculum organization,” “curriculum evaluation,” and “overall competence,” and interviews had proven this difference.
(Ⅳ) With respect to level of teaching, teachers who taught higher levels of students performed significantly better than those who teach lower levels in the aspect of “curriculum selection” competence.
(Ⅴ)With respect to locations of teaching, teachers in remote areas were significantly better than urban areas in the aspects of “curriculum organization” and “curriculum evaluation” competence. Urban teachers were significantly better than teachers in rural in the aspect of “curriculum selection,” “curriculum organization,” “curriculum implementation,” and “curriculum evaluation.”
(Ⅵ)With respect to size of school, teachers of larger schools were significantly superior to teachers of small schools in every aspect of curriculum design competence and “overall competence.”
(VII)Teachers of schools experimenting with the nine-year integrated curriculum were significantly superior to have not participated in the experimental curriculum in the aspect of “curriculum evaluation” competence.
(Ⅷ)Teachers participating in curriculum design of experimental schools were significantly superior to have not participated in curriculum design in “curriculum selection,” “curriculum organization,” and “overall competence.” Interviews also proved this difference.
Ⅲ. Professional attitude, achievement motivation, and opportunity for in-service education of elementary school teachers had a significant impact on curriculum design competence; interviews also proved this relationship.
(Ⅰ)Teachers with higher “curriculum belief” had higher curriculum design competence. Interviews also proved this connection, and teachers interviewed had consensus on this.
(Ⅱ)Teachers with higher “teaching belief” had higher curriculum design competence. Interviews also proved this connection, and teachers interviewed had consensus on this.
(Ⅲ)Teachers with higher “education attitude” had higher curriculum design competence. Interviews also proved this connection, and most teachers interviewed had consensus on this.
(Ⅳ)Teachers with higher “social-oriented” achievement motivation had lower curriculum design competence. Interviews also proved this connection, and most teachers interviewed had consensus on this.
(Ⅴ)Teachers with higher “individual-oriented” achievement motivation had higher curriculum design competence. Interviews also proved this connection, and teachers interviewed had consensus on this.
(Ⅵ)Teachers with more hours spent in attending seminars on curriculum ideas held off campus had higher curriculum design competence. Interviews also proved this connection, and teachers interviewed had consensus on this.
(VII)Teachers read more articles in journals and books, on the Internet, and in professional publications had higher curriculum design competence. Interviews also proved this connection, and teachers interviewed had consensus on this.
Ⅳ.Professional attitude, achievement motivation, and access to in-service education could effectively interpret the relationship between background variables and curriculum design competence. Interviews also proved this connection. The major elements were included in the above variables.
(Ⅰ)Teachers with longer service had significantly higher curriculum design competence than the less seniority. After intervening variables were controlled, it was known that they had higher “curriculum belief,” “teaching belief,” “educational attitude,” and “individual orientation” achievement motivation, which could effect their curriculum design competence.
(Ⅱ)Teachers with administrative works were significantly superior to classroom teachers, and interviews have proven this difference. After intervening variables were controlled, it was known they have higher “curriculum belief,” “teaching belief,” “educational attitude,” “individual orientation,” “off-campus seminar on concepts,” and “un-supervised reading of articles.”
(Ⅲ)Teachers with graduate education were significantly superior to the college education in curriculum design competence, and interviews also proved this difference. After intervening variables were controlled, it was known that they read more articles and thus effect their curriculum design competence.
(Ⅳ)With respect to locations of teaching: (1)Urban teachers were significantly superior to rural in curriculum design competence. After intervening variables were controlled, it was known that they had higher “teaching belief,” and “off-campus seminar on concepts.”(2)Teachers in remote areas were significantly superior to the urban in curriculum design competence. After intervening variables were controlled, it was known that they had higher “educational attitude,” “individual orientation,” and “off-campus seminar on concepts.”
(Ⅴ)Teachers of larger schools were significantly superior to teachers of small schools in curriculum design competence. After intervening variables were controlled, it was known that they had higher “curriculum belief,” and “educational attitude.”
(Ⅵ)Teachers of experimentation schools with the nine-year curriculum were significantly superior to teachers of schools that did not participate in the experimentation. After intervening variables were controlled, it was known that they had higher “curriculum belief.”
(VII)Teachers participating in curriculum design of experimentation schools are significantly superior to those who did not participate in curriculum design, and interviews also proved this connection. After intervening variables were controlled, it was known that they had higher “curriculum belief,” “off-campus seminar on concepts,” and “un-supervised reading of articles.”
|
|---|
